MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, HOST: Good evening, Americans. Welcome to THE ED SHOW. I`m Michael Eric Dyson, in for Ed Schultz, as he prepares to start his new weekend show.

A Republican senator comes out for gay marriage two years after his son tells him he`s gay.

Sarah Palin and Karl Rove are at each other`s throats.

The Republican autopsy is in, but they`re still stuck on slavery.

What the devil is going on with the History Channel?

And the architects of the Iraq war are still wrong a decade later.

But, tonight, we start in Steubenville, Ohio.

This is THE ED SHOW -- and as Ed would say -- let`s get to work.

Let`s begin with the facts. Two members of the Steubenville high school football team were found guilty this weekend of raping a 16-year-old girl last year. Judge Thomas Lipps handed down the verdicts in juvenile court.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE THOMAS LIPPS, JEFFERSOIN CO. JUVENILE COURT: Regarding the charges of rape, both of defendants, Malik Richmond and Trent Mays, are committed to the Department of Youth Services for a minimum period of one year, a maximum period until you`re 21.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: The defendants were taken into custody and sent to a juvenile detention center. They are awaiting assessment of where they will be placed to serve their sentences. Sixteen-year-old Malik Richmond was found delinquent on charges of rain that carry a minimum of one year in detention. Seventeen-year-old Trent Mays was found delinquent on charges of rape and illegal use of a minority in nudity-oriented material. He was sentenced to a minimum of two years in a juvenile detention center for his offense against a minor.

Both teens could remain in juvenile detention until they are 21.

Those are the basic facts of Sunday`s verdict. But the immediate reaction to the news was driven almost entirely by emotion.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN: I cannot imagine, having just watched this on the feed coming in, how emotional that must have been sitting in the courtroom.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: The emotion being discussed was not of the victim or the victim`s family. It was a reaction to the defendants breaking down in court. Both of them sobbed and offered words of regret minutes before hearing their fates. So, in response to the news of a guilty verdict in a rape case, the story was defined by the suffering of the accused?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

POPPY HARLOW, CNN: It was incredibly emotional, incredibly even difficult for an outsider like me to watch what happened as these two young men that had such promising futures, star football players, very good students, literally watched as they believed their life fell apart.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Many would argue their lives fell apart the moment they engaged in rape, a sex crime they have been convicted of in court.

The coverage of the verdict exploited whatever emotion was conveniently available at the moment. In this instance, it was the emotion of two young men who were facing the consequences of their actions. Their actions were downplayed and their punishment was judged, and in so doing, the media gave tacit approval to blame the victim.

The flood of reactions on social media are a testament to that. Countless messages included sexual taunts toward the teenage girl, saying she should have been aware of they are surroundings, and blaming her for drunken decisions that ruined innocent lives. Two 16-year-old girls have been arrested for making death threats to the victim on Twitter.

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine struck a different know when addressing the verdict. He seemed to remember the person who was actually the victim of a crime.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE DEWINE (R), OH ATTORNEY GENERAL: The prosecutor`s most important duty is to seek justice. And I believe what we saw today is in fact justice. My heart goes out to the victim and her family.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: DeWine added another sentiment. He said every rape is a tragedy. In this instance, those covering the story would have done well to remember who perpetrated this tragedy and who was a victim of it.

Get your cell phones out. I want to know what you think.

Tonight`s question: did the media lose sight of the real victim in the Steubenville case? Text A for yes, text B for no, to 67622, or go to our blog at Ed.MSNBC.com. I`ll bring you the results later in the show.

I`m joined by Zerlina Maxwell, political analyst and a contributor to TheGrio.com, Irin Carmon, writer for Salon.com, and Salamishah Tillet, professor at the University of Pennsylvania and cofounder of "A Long Walk Home."

Ladies, thank you for joining me.

Zerlina, why did this particular story create a type of reaction we just saw where there was such a fierce emotional investment in those who perpetuated the crime and not that woman who was the victim?

ZERLINA MAXWELL, THEGRIO.COM: I think first we need to put this into context of the larger dynamic of rape culture. And so, this is one of the 3 percent of cases where rapists are actually convicted and punished for their crime.

And so, this is the minority of cases, but also, I think we all operate under this rape culture that I keep talking about in many of my articles, and that is because we put the blame and the responsibility on women to prevent women. And instead, we should be empathizing with victims and not blaming victims and also supporting victims and being a support system and an advocate so that they themselves are not revictimized by the rest of us when the focus is on what they should have done to prevent it, and instead not on the people that perpetrated the crime.

DYSON: Right.

Erin, obviously there was a retraumatization of the victim herself as a result of being tried in the public opinion and then demonized more broadly as what Zerlina has talked about as a rape culture. Does the reaction to the story illustrate a problem with the way people are educated about rape and consent?

IRIN CARMON, SALON.COM: Absolutely. I think given the age of the offenders, given the age of the victims, it is so clear that the perpetrators were operating with impunity, that the education about consent needs to begin much earlier, that they believed they were above the law, and that when they were documenting it, they didn`t realize that what they were doing is they were creating evidence in a criminal case. They believed that because the coach had their backs, which suggests that this is a long-standing cultural issue, that absolutely nothing would happen to them.

So, instead of focusing on the victims` behavior, what we should be focusing on is how do we intervene in this culture that tells boys that they don`t have to respect women as humans, and if they sexually humiliate young girls, absolutely nothing will happen to them? So, if there`s anything we can learn from this one verdict, it is the fact that people need to understand what consent is, what substantial impairment is, and intervene in a toxic cultural of masculinity.

DYSON: Professor Tillet, speaking about the toxic culture of masculinity that Ms. Carmon just spoke of, you, of course, spent a great deal of time away from the classroom trying to educate both young women and young men about these issues. The mother of the victim actually delivered a statement in court to the defendants.

She said, in part, "Your decisions that night affected countless lives, including those most dear to you. You were your own accuser through the social media that you chose to publish your criminal conduct on. This does not define who my daughter is. She will persevere, grow and move on. I have pity for both of you. I hope you fear the Lord, repent for your actions, and pray hard for his forgiveness."

In a situation where victim`s identity needs to be protected, is there responsibility for those words to be heard and heard widely?

SALAMISHAH TILLET, CO-FOUNDER, A LONG WALK HOME: Yes, I think the other responsibility is for the media to understand what recovering from sexual assault is like. So I think that was the big problem here. Not only was there over-sympathy for the defendants in this case, but there was seeming lack of concern for what rain does to victims of sexual assault.

The stats are overwhelming. It`s 20 percent of women who experience sexual assault are going to try to commit suicide. It`s the number one reason women drop out of college. It`s the number why girls drop out of high school. And about 60 percent of women who are incarcerated already experienced sexual assault.

So, the long legacy of sexual assault and how it impairs victims seems to have been lost in this process, as people who were overly sympathizing or overly grieving for the defendants.

DYSON: And not only were they overly sympathizing and grieving for the defendant, there seems to be, Zerlina, a kind of meta narrative going on here. If we were in the schoolroom, we would talk about there`s a narrative and there`s the narrative on the narrative.

So the reaction of the media was striking here. Here`s more of the media reaction immediately following the verdict.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CROWLEY: What`s the lasting effect, though, on two young men being found guilty in juvenile court of rape, essentially?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Is it unusual for there to be such profound sympathy for the guilty parties, or do you think there`s something different about this specific case that kind of captured the imagination of the nation?

MAXWELL: Well, certainly we have two football players, and so I think in the United States we lionize athletes to a degree that really is unnecessary. But, you know, in reality, the reaction is not any different from rape cases all over the country. Many times women internalize this greater narrative of rain culture and they blame themselves while they think that they don`t want to press charges because they`re going to ruin the perpetrator`s life.

And that is wrong. And that`s what we need to change. We need to change the conversation entirely and focus on the choices and the actions of the person who committed the crime, because the only reason rain happens is rapists choose to commit rain. That is what we need to be talking about.

And instead we always talk about what the victims could have and should have done to avoid rape, and that`s completely wrong.

DYSON: Irin, how do we push past this identification with the two young men, the boys in this case and focus squarely again on this female victim, because it seems that some people are blaming the victim because either they knew the details of the case or didn`t care or didn`t know, like the damning text messages the defendant sent.

Do you think people are aware of the broader context of this case?

CARMON: Well, I`m inspired by the bravery of this young woman who testified in front of her accusers and who went against the tide in a town that worshipped football and football players. And I`m very inspired by her mother`s statement as well where she says that her daughter won`t be defined by it.

In terms of the town now, it looks like there`s going to be a grand jury convened. I think there are a lot of unanswered questions when it comes to the actions of the coach and his failure to report a sex crime that he was aware of, and that according to the text messages, he laughed off.

I think there`s a lot of questions about the behavior of the boys who were there, some of whom have struck deals for immunity. They have a presence of mind. One of the boys did not let her friend drive drunk.

And so, we need those kinds of interventions when it comes to sexual assault, if you see somebody vulnerable to a predator, if you see someone who is about to breach someone`s boundaries of consent, you have to -- in the same way, that you grab their keys, you have to put a stop to it, and there were so many opportunities in this tragic case that moving beyond requires recognizing how it could have been stopped.

DYSON: Yes. Well, that`s a difficult transition, but we`ve got to focus on how do we develop empathy for those who are at risk in terms of sexual assault into the same degree as we do for somebody driving drunk like Ms. Carmon just said.

Professor Tillet, do you think stories like this make it more difficult for victims of sexual assault to feel that they can come forward? There`s a huge stigma and great deal of empathy, it seems, for those who commit the crime and not for those who are its victim.

TILLET: Yes, in general, I think that`s the case. But I do think this situation and guilty verdict here may lead young girls and women to come forward, may lead to more women and more girls coming forward. I would hope so. I`d hope that would be the response.

And I think the mother`s language about her daughter`s strength and perseverance really helps survivors understand this isn`t just one woman`s story or one girl`s story, it`s many of our stories.

So, yes, I would hope it would make a difference. Each time these cases become public spectacles, whether it was 2011 in Cleveland, Texas, where an 11-year-old was sexually assaulted by 18 men and boys or whether it is a high profile case, it always leads to survivors to sort of suffocate their experiences and holding in their stories more and not coming forward and getting the justice they rightly deserve.

DYSON: Let`s all hope we can help these people in that particular city, but across America, exhale with a great sigh for justice.

Zerlina Maxwell, Irin Carmon, and Professor Salamishah Tillet -- thank you so much for your time tonight.

MAXWELL: Thank you.

CARMON: Thank you.

TILLET: Thank you.

DYSON: Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen and share your thoughts on Twitter @EdShow, and on Facebook. I want to know what you think.

A Republican senator now supports gay marriage because of his son? I`ll tell you why it may be too little, too late.

Stay tuned.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DYSON: Slavery, Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz all played a role at CPAC this weekend. Our big panel weighs in on the Republican Party`s identity crisis.

And on the eve of the tenth anniversary of the Iraq war, one of the architects is talking about the mistakes. I`ll comb over this one later.

And make sure to join Ed Schultz on his new time slot 5:00 to 7:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday, coming soon.

Share your thoughts on Facebook and on Twitter using #EdShow.

We`ll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DYSON: When Senator Rob Portman became the only sitting Republican senator to support gay marriage, he broke new ground for the cause of equal rights. But in the wake of the senator`s announcement, we can`t help but wonder why it took him so long?

Senator Portman explained that in February of 2011, his son Will told Portman and his wife that he`s gay. "It allowed me to think of this issue from a new perspective and that`s of a dad who loves his son a lot and wants him to have the same opportunities his brother and sister would have." That`s great. Truly is.

Two questions: first, why did it take two years for Senator Portman to change his views after this revelation from his son? We do know that last year Portman was being vetted as a possible running mate for Mitt Romney. According to Portman, the Romney camp said the issue had no impact in choosing Congressman Paul Ryan over Portman.

Second, why is it necessary to have firsthand experience with a person or situation in order to figure out how to do the right thing? Is an existential experience necessary for intellectual consent?

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said this about Senator Portman`s decision.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REINCE PRIEBUS, RNC CHAIRMAN: I think Senator Portman made some pretty big inroads last week, but I think it`s about being decent, and respect, that nobody deserves to have their dignity diminished or people don`t deserve to be disrespected.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Priebus stopped short of endorsing Portman`s position and obviously the RNC does not.

And here`s House Speaker John Boehner.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: I believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. It`s what I grew up with, it`s what I believe. It`s what my church teaches me and I can`t imagine that position would ever change.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: You know the church taught segregation before it taught integration and racial justice. Churches do change, and their members as well.

Meanwhile, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Rodham expressed her support of marriage equality in this advocacy video.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: I support it individually and as a matter of policy and law. Like so many others, my personal views have been shaped over time by people I have known and loved, by my experience representing our nation on the world`s stage, my devotion to law and human rights, and the guiding principles of my faith.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Finally, public support for gay marriage is at an all-time high. Fifty-eight percent support marriage equality. Only 36 percent opposed.

Let`s bring in the national spokesperson for GLAAD, Wilson Cruz.

Brother Cruz, there`s former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying her views have been shaped in part by people she`s known, but it was not the only factor. It`s a human rights issue as well. So, it`s not just personal. It`s principle.

So the accolades for Senator Portman`s announcement need to be put that a context, don`t they?

WILSON CRUZ, GLAAD NATIONAL SPOKESPERSON: They do, but, you know, Senator Portman and Mrs. Clinton are two examples of people who are examples of what we know at GLAAD, what we`ve always known at GLAAD, which is when people know us, when they know our stories, when they`re part of our lives and they hear our stories, they understand our issues and they are on our side.

So, you know, we applaud Senator Portman for his statement and for supporting his son. You know, his son has the right to love whoever he chooses, and just like his brothers and his sisters. So we welcome that.

And as for Mrs. Clinton, she`s always been a great supporter of our community, and we`re not shocked by her eloquent statement today.

DYSON: Let me push you a little bit here, because some people have personal experiences with gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual people and don`t like them, are further reinforced in their value. So the personal doesn`t automatically transfer to the principle. Wouldn`t you rather have principled investment in an idea?

I know you appreciate Senator Portman and Secretary Clinton, but beyond them, wouldn`t you appreciate a principled adherence to ideals and beliefs and concepts that give you purchase on, you know, support for equality -- marriage equality as opposed to people simply having personal stories which can`t be predicted to necessarily be positive?

CRUZ: Yes, I would, but I also know that the best way for people to change their minds is a personal experience.

That being said, you know, when I hear a statement like John Boehner`s, I want to say to him, you know, I have seen how moved he has been many times by the reaching for the American dream. And what I ask him is, does that mean that someone who loves another person of the same sex is -- doesn`t deserve to reach for that American dream just because of that fact? Do I not get to -- do I not get to reach my own goals and my own aspirations and my own dreams just because I am a gay man?

Do we limit our American dream just to people who he happens to find are acceptable?

So I urge him to go out and reach out to our community and to get to know us and see that we have dreams just like he does, just like his children, just like his family. And we deserve all the rights and privileges that come with the American citizenship.

DYSON: But you see that Speaker Boehner has already indicated he can`t imagine changing his views. When do you think most Republicans --

(CROSSTALK)

CRUZ: I have great hope for him.

DYSON: You should, but when do you think it will become a human rights issue, versus a kind of resistance predicated upon religious belief or traditional insight and traditional belief?

CRUZ: Well, I think we`re on the road to that right now. I mean, all we have to do is look at the poll that came out today and see that the momentum really is on our side. You know, we only have to look about 10 years ago and see that those polls were almost the opposite of what they are today. So the momentum truly is on our side. And that really is because of the fact that this community has been so brave in telling their own stories and their own experiences because we know that`s how people change their minds.

So I think that people really are seeing it through the lens of human rights. And that happens because they know someone in their family or in their church or in their neighborhood or on their TVs, you know, when they read the newspaper about someone who is LGBT. So I really think that that is happening, and it`s happening at warp speed.

DYSON: All right. Well, we hope they beam them up, Scottie.

Wilson Cruz, actor, activist and spokesperson for GLAAD, thank you so very kindly.

CRUZ: Thank you for having me.

DYSON: The woman that lost the 2008 election and the man that helped lose the 2012 election are at each other`s throats. That`s next.

And later, a shouting match breaks out at CPAC. The issue? Slavery. The big panel tackles this later.

First, conservative love for Sarah Palin and large sodas is alive and well -- take that, Bloomberg.

And second, it`s overly clear the Republican Party has fractured into two camps. On one side, you have the GOP establishment, the same old members of the Republican Party like Senator John McCain and House Speaker John Boehner.

Your typical establishment presidential candidate would be someone like Mitt Romney. On the flip side, you have the grassroots extreme Tea Party favorites, Republicans like Texas Senator Ted Cruz and Tea Party firebrand Rand Paul.

It became clear at CPAC that grassroots Republicans are furious with the establishment`s choice in political candidates.

Eighty-eight-year-old conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly even called for a fight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY, CONSERVATIVE ACTIVIST: Unfortunately, we let the establishment pick you`re loser for us. The fight I`m asking you to engage in is between the establishment and the grassroots, because the establishment has given us a whole series of losers, Bob Dole and John McCain and Mitt Romney.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Boy, that`s kind of heavy on Jim Carrey lo-who-who-ser. But Sarah Palin took the establishment-bashing to the next level. She slammed dark money king Karl Rove for picking failed Republican candidates.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PALIN: If these experts who keep losing elections, keep getting rehired and raking in millions, if they feel that`s strongly about who gets to run in this party, then they should buck up or stay in the truck. Buck up and run. They can head on back to the great Lone Star State and put their name on some ballot. Though for their sake, I hope they give themselves a discount on their consulting services.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Buck up, huh? Rove was unimpressed with Palin`s remarks and hit right back the following day.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARL ROVE, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Look, I appreciate her encouragement that I go home to Texas and run for office. I would be enthused if I ran for office to have her support. I would say this, I don`t think I`m a particular good candidate, t sort of a balding, fat guy. And second of all, I would say, if I did run for office and win, I`d serve out my term. I wouldn`t leave office mid-term.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Oh, everything you say bounces off to me and sticks to you, huh? It looks like Republican infighting over their future will be heating up going into the midterms. But Rand Paul winning the CPAC straw poll could indicate what direction they are headed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REINCE PRIEBUS, RNC CHAIRMAN: We know that we have problems.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Reince Priebus says he has the cure for Republicans after the fireworks at CPAC.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRIEBUS: We`ve identified them and we`re implementing the solutions to fix them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: The big panel takes on the Republican meltdown next.

Plus Obama Derangement Syndrome rears its ugly head on the History Channel.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Could it be Satan?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: And later, 10 years after the start of the Iraq War, one of its architects is finally coming to terms with the mistakes that were made.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRIEBUS: There`s no one reason we lost. Our message was weak. Our ground game was insufficient. We weren`t inclusive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: That was RNC Chair Reince Priebus introducing a 100-page autopsy report, which explains how the Republican brand has turned off voters. The report called "The Growth and Opportunity Project" predicts dire consequences for the GOP if it continues along its current past.

Quote, "the GOP today is a tale of two parties. One of them, the gubernatorial wing, is growing and successful. The other, the federal wing, is increasingly marginalizing itself. And unless changes are made, it will be increasingly difficult for Republicans to win another presidential election in the near future."

Yet the report doesn`t address the party`s policies. Instead, the focus is on messaging.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRIEBUS: The way we communicate our principles isn`t resonating widely enough. Focus groups described our party as narrow minded, out the touch, and, quote, "stuffy old men."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: And while Mr. Priebus and the RNC will be investing millions of dollars into appealing to young voters, as well as women and minorities, it may not be enough. Here`s what Priebus is up against.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT TERRY, NORTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN: I feel like my people, my demographic are being systematically disenfranchised.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: That was 30-year-old Scott Terry of North Carolina. He was just one of a room full of attendees at a CPAC discussion called "Trump the Race Card. Are You Sick and Tired of Being Called a Racist When You Know You`re Not One?"

Mr. Terry is worried that all this talk of minority outreach is coming at the expense of young, white, southern males like himself. Mr. Terry explained his concerns to the event`s moderator, K. Carl Smith, an African-American conservative and member of the Frederick Douglas Republicans.

Mr. Terry asked Mr. Smith if he would support racial segregation, as Booker T. Washington advocated. Smith responded by citing a letter Douglas wrote to his former slave master.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

K. CARL SMITH, FREDERICK DOUGLASS REPUBLICANS: When Douglass escaped from slavery, I think 10 years or 20 years after he escaped from slavery, he writes a letter to his former slave master and says, I forgive you for all the things you did to me.

TERRY: For giving him shelter and food and --

SMITH: No!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Food and shelter? Don`t forget those chains. Let`s turn to E.J. Dionne of the "Washington Post," Janaye Ingram, Washington bureau chief of the National Action Network, and Benji Sarlin, political reporter for "Talking Points Memo."

Let`s get right to it, E.J. Dionne. What we witnessed seems to be at odds with the 100 page RNC report doesn`t it? I mean, the reaching out to minorities and to women, but this seems to be a step backwards.

E.J. DIONNE, "THE WASHINGTON POST": No kidding. You know, when I was watching Chairman Priebus list all the things they did wrong in the last election, he was chairman of the party, you expect the next words to be, so I`m resigning and passing this party on to someone else.

But that moment you just showed, let`s stipulate that guy is not a typical Republican. However, the Republican party has systematically walked back from its proud role as the party of Lincoln, and as Sam Tannenhouse (ph) argued in a very interestingly article in "The New Republic," they`ve been using almost Calhounist, neo-Confederate language about radicalist visions of state`s rights, interposition, nullification, even talk of secession.

When they start talking like that, they obviously turn off African-Americans. But there are a lot of middle of the road white Americans who say, what is this party right now? So yes, they do have to make all these messaging changes. But it`s not just about messaging. It`s about some fundamental arguments they`re making that play into the image that Priebus described very well when he talked about all the thing they did wrong.

DYSON: No doubt. In light of what Professor Dionne has said, you were there. You saw what went on. You reported on it. So tell us what most surprised you. What kind of took your breath away, like, that`s a heck of a thing?

BENJAY SARLIN, "TALKING POINTS MEMO": It was kind of an escalating series of steps. First of all, the talk itself was interesting. It was very similar sort to what you were saying about Reince Priebus. The moderator`s message is basically you don`t have to change anything to attract black voters. Just call yourself a Frederick Douglass Republican. That really is pretty much it.

So then you have this guy stand up, say this just unbelievably racist filth about slavery. And it`s not like the crowd`s cheering. I don`t want to misrepresent this. But what`s strange is that they don`t throw these guys out. There`s no outrage against these guys. It`s -- I don`t think anyone agrees with them, but it just doesn`t seem like something that`s out of line.

So this continues. They start shouting at a -- there was a liberal black radio host who was there who was shocked by this and starting to trying to ask questions and interrupting a little. She got shouted down, saying, boo, you`re not welcome.

It just kept getting weirder until finally afterwards, I went up to the participants because I just had to know, what do you make of this strange display? You`re here to trying to court black voters. What did you take away?

No one seemed to be offended by these guys saying this stuff about slavery, while they were very offended by this woman interrupting them. It was just a completely bizarre set of responses.

DYSON: In light of what Mr. Sarlin said, Miss Ingram, isn`t that the problem because -- that the Republicans have? Because the session is already giving up a lot of ground. Aren`t you tired of being called a racist when you`re not really one. So they`ve already acknowledged the fact that there`s a hypersensitivity about racism. But that still wasn`t enough. This black man ends up having to encounter a young while male who believes that he`s been disadvantaged as a result of the concentration on minorities.

Where does that leave the Republican party? And what does it say about their racial issues.

JANAYE INGRAM, NATIONAL ACTION NETWORK: Well, I think their racial issues are really bigger. It`s really a relational problem. If you read "The Growth and Opportunity Report, it talks little about building relationships. It`s more like let`s go to these specific groups and we`re going to tell them what we`re about, as opposed to actually having a conversation and hearing what matters to those communities.

And I think that this sort of spoke to that, that they`re not really interested in tackling some of the more challenging issues that they`re having. They`re just more interested in appearing as if they`re challenging or tackling those issues.

DYSON: That`s a good point. Given that -- you can jump in, but I`m saying appearance versus the reality that there`s -- they don`t even often make the appearance to be the case that they`re trying to reach out to minority people.

DIONNE: You know, I was watching that and hearing your account, and what I was thinking of is, what would Jack Kemp say if he were alive? Now Jack Kemp was someone who was really conservative. He never met a tax cut he didn`t like. We used to argue about all his tax cuts.

But he had in his heart and soul a deep hatred of racism which he conveyed to everybody. No one had any doubts about where Jack Kemp stood on this --

(CROSS TALK)

DIONNE: And he would have called an audible right in that room. And you want to say to the Republicans, you`ve got to remember -- all right, you`re not going to remember Lincoln. That`s a long time ago. Think back to somebody like Jack Kemp, who combined conservatism with a real sort of concern about justice and equality.

DYSON: What does it say, Benji, that given what E.J. Dionne has just indicated -- Jack Kemp, that`s not that long ago. We`re nostalgic, even for a Bush -- until recent faux pas notwithstanding, kind of demeanor, that says we`re balanced on these issues. What the heck happened that they`re so far right -- they`ve tacked so far right that the Republican party has no sense of what the mainstream is concerned about?

SARLIN: Well, this is one of those problems when you don`t have a clear leader. When there was President Bush, he never got credit from liberals for this at the time, because who knew what was coming, but he was keeping a lid on a lot of this stuff. Bush really -- he was a believer in a lot of Kemp. His compassionate conservatism was very much derived from Kemp.

Without that, though, you just -- first, there were really no leaders and you just had the Tea Party movement rising up. And then a lot of the leaders they produced are in these very conservative House districts mostly. So you just end up with -- without someone really to lead them and say, look, I talked to people outside our group, and these certain things are deal-breakers for them. I know it sounds great when you`re talking to each other.

And Reince Priebus did address this a bit. He talked about the ideological cul-de-sac that Republicans were driving around in, where they just never stopped to hear what other people were thinking. So in that sense, I think it`s huge progress even just to go to these communities and go to these groups and actually ask, OK, I`m not going to guess why you`re not voting for me. Why don`t you actually tell me why you aren`t voting for me?

DYSON: No doubt. Look, not all conservatives are sold on this RNC report, Janaye. Sarah Palin took a swipe at the rebranding effort. So did Michelle Malkin. And Rush Limbaugh warned listeners today that the Republican party is getting bamboozled. How`s that for quoting some Malcolm X there?

How difficult is it -- how difficult is it for the GOP to really be transformed? How hard is going to be for them to see a different way?

INGRAM: I think it`s going to be a real challenge for them. I think having Reince Priebus come out and say that this is the way we`re going to transform the party is one thing. But in reality, he`s not on the ground. He`s not the one who is sitting in Senate or in Congress or even in the state houses.

He`s really a figurehead. And really the party itself is going to have to decide whether they want to go the way of Reince Priebus or whether they want to, you know, go in the three other directions that they`re going.

DYSON: Right. I want to say Three Blind Mice. E.J. Dionne, Janaye Ingram and Benji Sarlin, thank you so very much.

DIONNE: Good to be with you.

DYSON: This man is comparing President Obama to the Devil again? That`s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DYSON: We love hearing from our fans on Facebook and Twitter. Many of you are responding to frustration over New York`s Stop and Frisk policies and the recent death of 16-year-old Kamani Kiki Gray, which has boiled over into confrontation on the street and in court.

On Facebook, Mike Davis says "next it will be shoot them and then frisk them."

Mary Ho writes, "it looks to me to be a police state. Hire and train more officers instead of violating people`s civil rights, and then get sued."

And Robert Connors says "it`s definitely an overreach of the police and needs to be addressed in the courts."

Go to our Facebook page right now and join the conversation. And don`t forget to like THE ED SHOW when you`re there. We`ll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You know, sometimes I reflect, is there something else I could do to make these guys -- I`m not talking about the leaders now, but maybe some of the House Republican caucus members -- not paint horns on my head.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Welcome back. At this point, it`s a joke. Republicans have been trying to portray President Obama as other since before he was even elected. It started with the Birther movement, but Obama Derangement Syndrome, as we like to call it, has taken many forms since then. He`s a socialist. He`s a Muslim, an elitist. He`s waging a war against religion. You get the idea.

But this weekend, the demonization of President Obama took a very literal turn. Twitter erupted during last night`s episode of the History Channel`s hugely popular miniseries, "The Bible," when some viewers pointed out a resemblance between the actor portraying Satan and President Obama. Viewers like Glenn Beck.

Beck tweeted, "anyone else think the devil in the "Bible" Sunday on the History Channel looks exactly like that guy."

By this morning, Obama Satan was trending on Twitter.

The History Channel released a statement, calling it "unfortunate that anyone made this false connection." But that hasn`t stopped right wing conspiracy sites from turning out delusional posts further comparing our president to the Devil.

So let me get this straight. The devil is a man who fought to reform healthcare so people with preexisting conditions can`t be denied coverage, a man who`s set to end a decade of war, a man who`s fighting to raise minimum wage to help America`s struggling workers, a man who puts the interests of the middle class ahead of the interests of the privileged?

Yes, sounds like to me some people need to get off the Internet and brush up on the Good Book.

Tonight in our survey, I asked you, did the media lose sight of the real victim in the Steubenville case? ninety five percent say yes; five percent say no.

A decade after lying us into a war of choice, Dick Cheney says he`d do it all over again. The great Eugene Robinson joins us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DYSON: Now for the Big Finish. Tomorrow marks 10 years since the U.S. invaded Iraq. And one of President Bush`s top advisers is trying to explain the war he helped sell to the American people. Paul Wolfowitz was the first senior official to advice President Bush to overthrow Saddam Hussein right after 9/11.

But he now says the war didn`t go according to plan. Wolfowitz told the "Sunday Times" that the U.S. bungled the occupation. Wolfowitz says the "most consequential failure was to understand the tenacity of Saddam`s regime."

This is the same Paul Wolfowitz who had a front row seat to Desert Storm under the first Bush administration, but apparently he still didn`t understand Saddam in 2003. Wolfowitz originally called for a broadened sustained campaign. But now he`s distancing himself from the war.

He tells the Times he was not the architect of the war and the invasion was not his plan. Wolfowitz insists the situation in Iraq had spiraled out of control long after he had left the Pentagon. Wolfowitz lashed out at critics who accused the Bush administration of lying about Saddam`s terrorist connections and supposed weapons program.

Wolfowitz defends Bush, saying a mistake is one thing, a lie is something else. But now we know the case for the Iraq war was based on a lie, not a mistake. A new MSNBC documentary called "Hubris" reveals how members of the Bush administration, including Paul Wolfowitz, demanded there was a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We all looked at each other like, what are they talking about? Who the hell -- Saddam Hussein? Bin Laden hates him, thinks he`s a heretic. There`s no connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DYSON: Wolfowitz`s so-called mistake has cost three trillion dollars and 4,475 American lives. Tonight, a poll shows 53 percent of Americans believe we should not have invaded Iraq 10 years ago. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney say they have no regrets about invading Iraq. And tonight, instead of taking responsibility, Paul Wolfowitz is criticizing the war he helped to create.

I`m joined now by Eugene Robinson, associate editor and Pulitzer Prize winning columnist for "the Washington Post," and an MSNBC political analyst. Gene Robinson, you`re a wordsmith of the first order. You`ve got a Pulitzer Prize to prove it. Was it a lie or a mistake?

EUGENE ROBINSON, "THE WASHINGTON POST": I have to go to lie, simply because, you know, they say, well, we didn`t -- we didn`t know, know, know that he didn`t have weapons of mass destruction. But they knew that the evidence that they were supposedly relying on for WMD was -- was shaky, because they were told that by the guy who went to gather the evidence. He said, this is shaky; this isn`t really -- this isn`t really yellow cake uranium. This isn`t what you said it was.

DYSON: Yes, right.

ROBINSON: And because it`s clear that from day one of the Bush administration, they had Iraq on their minds. And they had getting rid of Saddam Hussein on their minds. And the idea that they didn`t know he would be tenacious? You don`t know Saddam Hussein is going to be tenacious?

But look, what this 10-year anniversary says to me is that they lied, they failed, whatever. We failed too, you know. And I`m speaking for journalism, really, for journalists.

ROBINSON: Right, it`s not to take -- take the line that officials are giving you, but to probe and to poke holes in it and to test it. And we didn`t do that sufficiently.

DYSON: Why not?

ROBINSON: We got caught up in the sort of group mind of Washington. And groupthink was saying, yes, it`s terribly important. And this is something we must do.

DYSON: Did they see it as a patriotic duty?

ROBINSON: The interesting thing is that there were reporters who did those stories that were critical, who quoted those retired intelligence officials or military officials, who were saying this makes no sense; this is not right. But those stories ran on page A-37.5, you know, of the "Washington Post" and the "New York Times" and the "L.A. Times" and the "Wall Street Journal."

And so yeah, they were there. But that`s not the way we should do it. This should be -- this should be a sober anniversary, I think, for us.

DYSON: Very much so, not intoxicated on self congratulation. But look, your colleague Bob Woodward at the "Washington Post," he of recent vintage of negotiating a hostile takeover of the Obama administration`s media outlets there, suggests that -- in his book that Colin Powell threw the stuff up in the air and said, this is bull feathers. This is not real. I mean, weren`t there members of the administration who knew this was not the real thing?

ROBINSON: Obviously -- clearly there were members of the administration who knew that -- who knew that Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, and the world perhaps would be better off without him, but knew that our rationale, what we were saying about why we were going to go mass a huge army and invade a country, was not true.

DYSON: Right.

Eugene Robinson, thank you so much for your insight, as usual, my friend.

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC ANCHOR: Good evening, Michael. Thank you. Thank you for talking about "Hubris" and that overall political context of it. I love hearing you and Gene talk about it. But it`s such an important thing. I really appreciate it.

DYSON: Thank you so much for making that documentary, Rachel. It`s a great one.

MADDOW: Thank you.

END

<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2013 NBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2013 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>